About your Search

20121201
20121231
Search Results 0 to 1 of about 2
to china and get the cheapest labor possible. now you have workers in the united states saying this is what we need. if you look at the dock workers, dock workers in the 1960's, about 35, 40,000. now down to 4,000. only 10%. why? because of automation your previous guest was talk. >> 64,000 for the longshoreman's union. but haven't unions priced themself out of market? they made themself obsolete. you pointed out, if you don't want to do business here, go to china. >> here's the deal, you have to import goods in the united states. what they've done is through automation, they have less and less dock workers. what the dock workers got as a concession was you have to give us a royalty on shipments given you're using automation. no you have owners of dock yards saying no, we're going to take that away or freeze it for people who come later. >> but why do you want to freeze business? why stick business in the mud right now so we can't progress? i'll give you a personal example. i was a floor trader, a human being on a trading floor. guess what happened? they figured out machines could do it bet
be dam sure that china mat change and there has been a warming up, what is open for ample and considerable debate is whether man is to blame for that and to then punish companies to then pay for a problem they may not be responsible for, in a dicey economic recovery globally, if that is what you call it, you are adding nonsense. >>guest: if we go back to the "old normal" the old normal was 1950s. we have had dramatic decrease in large or big tornadoes since the 1950's. hurricanes, dramatically down. drought, floods. the bottom line, they are even if we were talking about it, their solution is a carbon tax. their solution are e.p.a. regulations and a carbon tax is fund to be useful in addressing climate issues. however as the "washington post" notes in an editorial a few weeks ago it will "bring in serious money" $125 billion a year is what washington is drooling over at the moment. if they can use sandy and exploit the victims and tush science on its head and try to claim that global warming caused sandy they will do it to get "serious money" of $125 billion a year. there
Search Results 0 to 1 of about 2

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)